MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

E067 Emotional health and well-being matters

2019· article· en· W2937394788 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Bezzant, Ailsa Bosworth, Hayley McBain

Bibliographic record

VenueLara D. Veeken · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHuman Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsArthritis Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The most common co-morbidities amongst people with RA are mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety, as evidenced by previous surveys and reports by NRAS. NRAS also understands, through interaction with its membership across the UK, that mental health and well-being are important issues for people living with RA and JIA. NRAS therefore partnered with City University to undertake a survey exploring the impact of RA and adult JIA on mental health. Methods: Following a focus group held in central London in early 2018 with a dozen NRAS members, NRAS and City University designed a survey to look at a range of aspects relating to emotional health and well-being, including validated questionnaires to compare data to existing research. The survey was open between May and July 2018, with participants recruited via NRAS newsletters, social media platforms, the NRAS HealthUnlocked forum and via healthcare professionals at rheumatology units. A total of 1,999 people participated in the survey and a final sample of 1,650 was used for analysis. Results: The survey found that people with RA and adult JIA were less satisfied with their life, believed the things in their life were less worthwhile, and were less happy. The proportion of people who scored poorly on life satisfaction and life worth was over 7 times greater in those with RA and adult JIA than the national average. Despite this, the survey found that 2 in 5 people had never been asked by a health professional about their emotional and psychological well-being, and 1 in 3 people who had requested or been offered support had never received it. Positive experiences that respondents shared of psychological support, such as GPs and rheumatologists being very supportive, the importance of family, and services offered by NRAS, demonstrate the benefits of good and appropriate support being available. Negative experiences, such as lack of health professional understanding about mental health, lack of understanding of RA by counsellors, and lack of personalised care demonstrate the future work that must be done to help adequately support people with RA and adult JIA. Conclusion: The survey has demonstrated the need to provide more effective self-management techniques of emotional as well as physical well-being, ultimately leading to overall improved health outcomes. In line with NICE guidelines, other additional support is needed, such as the availability of cognitive behavioural therapy and the implementation of mental health and well-being assessments at annual review. Further research is needed into specific areas, such as health inequalities and why people with severe mental health issues experience poorer disease activity, understanding why adults with JIA have poorer life quality than people with RA, and understanding the impact of psychological interventions for people with adult JIA. Disclosures: M. Bezzant: None. A. Bosworth: None. H. McBain: None.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLara D. VeekenSame topicHuman Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207